If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Give me a break...

Ugh, the anti-GNOME circlejerk here is utterly ridiculous. For one, all of you rage over a whole bunch of "mandatory" features that really any half-wit with two minutes of Gnome Tweak Tool and DConf Editor usage could solve. Sure, is it placed directly in Control Panel? No. But to say that this is all just a bunch of crap that's forced down your throats when, in most cases, there's a little bit of tweaking involved is simply lazy.

Originally Posted by elipsey

User's didn't like mandatory suspend on lid close when their laptops were plugged in, because theyre earth raping, electricity wasting Gaia haters, but we gave it to them anyway!

And they also gave them the ability to toggle that feature within DConf Editor: org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power.
"But installing things is SOOOO much work. I hate having to customize."
Then what did you get Linux for again?

Originally Posted by bwat47

I hope they fix the gnome-shell lock screen first, because as it is know its a buggy piece of shit. It doesn't even respect "lock after" in system settings, and sometimes it starts to get super slow (it will lock like 1 min after you hit ctrl alt l).

Okay, so I tried this out and found that you are correct here (with respect to not adhering to "lock after" in system settings). However, this does work when set to "lock after screen turns off," which is a small problem, but not necessarily one that can't be overcome by simply adjusting screen blanking time. And those who think it's somehow unreasonable to have a shell that performs screen lock only after the screen has shut off (we're not talking about suspend/hibernate here) perhaps would be equally as interested in complaining about the Common Cold and gas prices.

Originally Posted by bwat47

Ubuntu would of course come up with an alternate solution... Either stick with the old gnome-screensaver for a while, fork it, roll their own etc... I believe linux mint has already forked it. Afiak ubuntu already had plans to eventually use the lightdm greeter as the lock screen instead of gnome screensaver.

Ah sure, you're right. Who needs suggestions? FORK ALL THE CODE!

Originally Posted by schmalzler

Woho, so from 3.8, gnome has one executable, that serves as desktop, window manager, compositor (all these already in <=3.6) and (new) screensaver. Long live modularity!

Uh, Mutter is the compositor, Gnome Shell is the window manager/desktop, and Nautilus can also act as a desktop side-by-side Gnome Shell. But it's such a shame that we couldn't segment GNOME into 500 other components so that there are even more lovely dependencies on install time.

Ugh, the anti-GNOME circlejerk here is utterly ridiculous. For one, all of you rage over a whole bunch of "mandatory" features that really any half-wit with two minutes of Gnome Tweak Tool and DConf Editor usage could solve. Sure, is it placed directly in Control Panel? No. But to say that this is all just a bunch of crap that's forced down your throats when, in most cases, there's a little bit of tweaking involved is simply lazy.

And they also gave them the ability to toggle that feature within DConf Editor: org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power.
"But installing things is SOOOO much work. I hate having to customize."
Then what did you get Linux for again?

Okay, so I tried this out and found that you are correct here (with respect to not adhering to "lock after" in system settings). However, this does work when set to "lock after screen turns off," which is a small problem, but not necessarily one that can't be overcome by simply adjusting screen blanking time. And those who think it's somehow unreasonable to have a shell that performs screen lock only after the screen has shut off (we're not talking about suspend/hibernate here) perhaps would be equally as interested in complaining about the Common Cold and gas prices.

Ah sure, you're right. Who needs suggestions? FORK ALL THE CODE!

Uh, Mutter is the compositor, Gnome Shell is the window manager/desktop, and Nautilus can also act as a desktop side-by-side Gnome Shell. But it's such a shame that we couldn't segment GNOME into 500 other components so that there are even more lovely dependencies on install time.

I have a laptop, so I like to keep the screen shut off time period low to save power, but I don't like it to lock that often because its annoying, so I usually set it to 30 minutes so it only locks when I'm haven't used it for a significant amount of time. Its a setting that worked before, and this kind of thing should have easily been caught and fixed earlier than this since its a fairly obvious bug. Its not that I'm that annoyed about this one specific thing, its that this has become an increasing trend with gnome releases, being released with very obvious bugs.

Uh, Mutter is the compositor, Gnome Shell is the window manager/desktop, and Nautilus can also act as a desktop side-by-side Gnome Shell. But it's such a shame that we couldn't segment GNOME into 500 other components so that there are even more lovely dependencies on install time.

Ah, so you really know about all that? Don't think so...
Running gnom3-session does NOT start mutter. Why? gnome-shell links against libmutter and uses functionality exposed in the lib for managing windows + compositing.
BUT: all in one fucking process! Make the shell (I mean desktop) hang and you won't be able to manage windows anymore. Same goes for the compositor (though it makes sense to have compositing functionality in the window manager).
And now gnome-shell will BE (not just start...) the screensaver. Making one procees responsible for so many different tasks is no good design :/

Ugh, the anti-GNOME circlejerk here is utterly ridiculous. For one, all of you rage over a whole bunch of "mandatory" features that really any half-wit with two minutes of Gnome Tweak Tool and DConf Editor usage could solve. Sure, is it placed directly in Control Panel? No. But to say that this is all just a bunch of crap that's forced down your throats when, in most cases, there's a little bit of tweaking involved is simply lazy.

And they also gave them the ability to toggle that feature within DConf Editor: org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power.
"But installing things is SOOOO much work. I hate having to customize."
Then what did you get Linux for again?

You know... I must say I find it funny how GNOME users complain about KDE's configurability but then demand that you go into their registry editor to configure things. I much prefer going System Settings -> Power Management and then configuring that per profile easily in a readily accessible and user friendly control panel.

Ah, so you really know about all that? Don't think so...
Running gnom3-session does NOT start mutter. Why? gnome-shell links against libmutter and uses functionality exposed in the lib for managing windows + compositing.
BUT: all in one fucking process! Make the shell (I mean desktop) hang and you won't be able to manage windows anymore. Same goes for the compositor (though it makes sense to have compositing functionality in the window manager).
And now gnome-shell will BE (not just start...) the screensaver. Making one procees responsible for so many different tasks is no good design :/

Indeed, some people miss it, but Mutter is a separate package from Gnome Shell, and having Gnome Shell doesn't mean Mutter is on your system at all(it usually isn't actually, except if you put it yourself). Only libmutter is used.
And I totally agree, a single process doing everything isn't that good .. I don't get why they did that. There's certainly no reason it would cut down on dependencies or something. Probably it makes debugging more difficult too.(Every crash will be the Gnome Shell process)

Indeed, some people miss it, but Mutter is a separate package from Gnome Shell, and having Gnome Shell doesn't mean Mutter is on your system at all(it usually isn't actually, except if you put it yourself). Only libmutter is used.
And I totally agree, a single process doing everything isn't that good .. I don't get why they did that. There's certainly no reason it would cut down on dependencies or something. Probably it makes debugging more difficult too.(Every crash will be the Gnome Shell process)

yeah unity actually seems much better in this respect for example. every unity service/lens/indicator etc... are different processes.

Indeed, some people miss it, but Mutter is a separate package from Gnome Shell, and having Gnome Shell doesn't mean Mutter is on your system at all(it usually isn't actually, except if you put it yourself). Only libmutter is used.
And I totally agree, a single process doing everything isn't that good .. I don't get why they did that. There's certainly no reason it would cut down on dependencies or something. Probably it makes debugging more difficult too.(Every crash will be the Gnome Shell process)

Really this is just one more questionable design decision on their part in a long list of questionable design decisions, including the aforementioned registry (which even Microsoft admits was a bad idea because .NET uses XML configs not the registry). The only question is when they're going to wake up and realize the mess they're in, I would hope that it's before they come to a screeching halt not really being able to develop further because of it.